Real Presence?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jitterbug
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jitterbug said:
Hello Everyone!

A Protestant friend of mine asked me about The Real Presence of the Eucharist.

Now, I understand it. I believe it. But I CANNOT explain it. I either make it sound very symbolic or cannibalistic.

So, I would like to ask if anyone had any answers or methods of explaining Real Presence.

Thanks in advance. 🙂
Click to expand...
I was delighted to learn that the Nativity account in the gospels is a Real Presence picture.

When the baby Jesus was born, He was wrapped in swaddling clothes, so that He was wrapped up like a cadaver!

And then He was laid in a manger, a feeding trough!

So, the story is a picture of the actual body of Jesus, after His sacrifice, being served as food!

To avoid the implication affirming the Catholic doctrine of the Real Presence, some Protestant Bible commentators have suggested that “manger” refers to the BUILDING, not the feeding trough.

What these commentators forget is that all of these things occurred in Bethlehem, Hebrew meaning “House of Bread.” I.e., not only are we being told that this baby came to have his actual sacrificed body served as food, but it would occur in the “House of Bread,” where He would presumably be served in the form of bread.

I’m satisfied that the story is a picture of the Real Presence.
 
Roy5 said:
Fine. I do have trouble with some of the adoration of David. He saw Bathsheba showering, had someone bring her to him, essentially raped her, then had her husband killed so that he could marry her. Now, how can we make such a sinner into a great hero? I also have serious trouble with the chant: “Saul has killed his thousands, but David has killed his ten thousands!”
Code: 
Would Jesus join in such a shout? I don't think so. 

 You raise many other points, but time and other duties keep me from responding at this time.

 God bless everybody.
Click to expand...
Ummm Adoration of David? Nowhere in any teachings do we ADORE OR WORSHIP DAVID… He was sinful…We are ALL sinners… Jesus used the OFFICE OF THE KINGSHIP, along with the Davidic Queen MOTHER and the office of the Prime Minister, for his one Church…All the Queens were MOTHERS to the king. The Prime Minister ( From Isaiah 22 18-25) is in conjuction with Matthew !6: 13-20… And Jesus is the Everlasting King ( I could provide many verses, but we both agree to that!)
 
(4) Christ spoke in metaphorical language and in parables all the time. I am the gate. I am the vine. I am the Good Shepherd, etc. How literal are we supposed to get?

Jesus used a lot of material objects to describe Himself–He said, “I am the Light.” “I am the Door.” “I am the Shepherd.”

But He never said, “That light is Me.” “That door is Me.” “That shepherd is Me.”

However, He did say, “That Bread is Me. That Wine is Me.”
 
Hi,
I would say that Transubstantiation is in a way like Transexual,
a man wants to become the object of desire, so Christ wants to
become the objects of our needs.
in Christ,
GLam
 
ConstantineTG said:
This is news to me. Real Presence is used by the Church and explains Christ’s actual presence in the Eucharist, body, blood, soul and divinity. Transubstantiation is not part of the faith, but rather a philosophical approach to explain the Real Presence. There have been many other attempt to explain how the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ even though it retains the physical appearance of bread and wine. You don’t have to believe in Transubstantiation, but you have to believe in the Real Presence. In the East, because of a difference of philosophical thought, Transubstantiation is not part of the catechesis. But we believe that the bread and wine becomes Christ just the same.
Click to expand...
Thanks for stating that clearly. 👍 I’ve understood the East/West difference the same way, but a lot of Catholics (Western) consider that claim to be wrong. They argue that if the East doesn’t believe in transubstantiation, they are wrong and need correcting.

Could you perhaps give me a reference to someone (Pope, Catechism, Church Father, Vatican document) that explains your point as explicitly as you do above?

I am really not trying to bait you - I want to be able to say to people that yes, we believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Transubstantiation, but these themselves are not the faith once delivered that is shared between East and West, but rather the Western explanation / understanding of that faith, and legitimate alternatives exist within the Catholic Church with her official blessing.

Thanks, and God bless!
 
Jitterbug said:
Hello Everyone!

A Protestant friend of mine asked me about The Real Presence of the Eucharist.

Now, I understand it. I believe it. But I CANNOT explain it. I either make it sound very symbolic or cannibalistic.

So, I would like to ask if anyone had any answers or methods of explaining Real Presence.

Thanks in advance. 🙂
Click to expand...
You have a body, it is the place and the object to which I will look and speak if I want to talk to “you”. The “you” with whom I wish to speak is your “soul” - when you say “I am me”, that is your soul (or your soul’s intellect) that is willing your body to project the words from your body’s mouth. If I look at someone else’s body but try to speak to you, all I get are strange looks back from that person. If I want to address you, I must meet you at your body, the body to which you (your soul) are one with. You (soul) are one with your body at present. And so we can talk to each other.

When Jesus is saying “Take and eat this bread; this is my body”, he is telling us “I (my soul) am one with this bread as my body, so that if you want to be in my presense in this physical world right now today, take this bread in your hand and you are holding me; don’t be afraid, it is truly me you are holding; eat my body, my flesh; I want to have myself become one with you, my body in you, my soul joined to you. And take this Chalice and drink from it; it is my blood that makes my body alive in you, making you alive in this covenant with me.”

The bread doesn’t change into a human body or the cup into human blood - instead Jesus joins his soul to a body of bread and suddenly it is the living bread come down from heaven. And best of all, it is Jesus present with you as you take him in your hand or mouth, as you look at him (at his body and blood), it is Him. When I talk to you, I am actually “believing” that somehow my words go into your body’s ears, and go beyond the physical processing of my words by your brain, and reach “you”, your soul. “You” are one with that body I am speaking to. Same the Jesus, we “believe” a reality that is more than the bread we see in front of us, that it is Jesus there, his “being” is one with the bread and wine. A very happy moment to be with Jesus, just as surely as if we were walking with him in Galilee.

John Martin
 
I am sorry if anyone is offended by my post, I just
thought it will help in explaining the concept
of Christ becoming what we need(i.e. Manna)
in the Eucharist.
We never need to feel lonely because the Real
Presence of Christ is available every time we
celebrate Mass! As we are part of His Presence
too, since we are His Body on Earth, let us
be ready to be broken as Bread for a sinful
dying world!
sincerely,
in Chirst,
GLam
 
I read through this thread and desired to express my appreciation for EricFilmer’s careful and charitable engagement with Roy5. I think his posts were not only a model of engagement in a setting such as this, but expressed with clarity the beauty of the Eucharist as an expression of God’s gracious love for us. I hope the faith of those who read the posts is strengthened. Mine was, and I thank you.
 
I think it is a matter of promise and Faith. At the Last Supper Jesus said, :This IS my My Body." It was not a ‘sorta’ statement. It was an identity statement in much the same way that God is Love is an identity statement. He offered both bread and wine in this manner, then asks that we do the same - again an active, definite statement. End of story as far as I am concerned.

A story I heard once, attributed to Carl Sagan, was that when the universe was formed out of the dust and chaos, everything was made from what coalesced out of that. Therefore we are “star stuff”.

Again, not original with me and I would attibute if I knew how to do so. - "I like to think that after Communion, as our bodies take in and distribute our Lord throughout our bodies, we become “God Stuff.” It is really a good thing to be! 😃
 
JDScotus said:
I read through this thread and desired to express my appreciation for EricFilmer’s careful and charitable engagement with Roy5. I think his posts were not only a model of engagement in a setting such as this, but expressed with clarity the beauty of the Eucharist as an expression of God’s gracious love for us. I hope the faith of those who read the posts is strengthened. Mine was, and I thank you.
Click to expand...
Thanks, JDScotus. I very much appreciate your kind words and affirmation.
 
Uzziah1 said:
I was delighted to learn that the Nativity account in the gospels is a Real Presence picture.

When the baby Jesus was born, He was wrapped in swaddling clothes, so that He was wrapped up like a cadaver!
Click to expand...
Not like a cadaver, no way. Jesus was wrapped in swaddling clothes because He came in humility and obedience to His heavenly Father. Life is over for a cadaver.

Jesus’ life was beginning in the perfect way. Jesus would eventually be the Bread of Life. A cadaver is dead.

Yes. Jesus was really present as a live baby. The Nativity scene is a wonderful picture of the love of Jesus as He is present to us. But one needs to be careful when picking out symbols. Symbols need to direct our hearts and minds to the ever present living God. A symbol of a decomposing cadaver is not inspiring.
 
Eucharist/ Transubstantiation *

Jesus is truly, wholly, and completely *present in the Eucharist in a metaphysical way, the physical properties, everything that can be perceived by our senses of bread and wine remain the same.
And non-Catholic Christians, believe something close to this when talking of justification before God through Christ Jesus. *St. Paul says in Scripture, “In Christ, we are made into a ‘new creation’.” *Now, clearly, this does not apply to our form – our “physical properties”, since we don’t look any different; and the world does not see any obvious physical change in a person when he or she becomes a believer in Christ. *However, according to the words of Scripture, we know that a metaphysical change HAS taken place – that the former sinner has been re-created in the image and likeness of Jesus, and is now a new creation. The metaphysical substance has changed. *Truly, wholly, entirely, and substantially. *And this is what we believe when it comes to the nature of the Lord’s Supper (the Eucharist).

Same with scripture it’s truly the word of God. Yet it looks no different than any other book.
 
God is also both body and spirit we are both body and spirit as well in our fullness. Those who don’t have comunion are at best only spiritualy united to God this is no more than what the Jews had. We become one with him when our fullness, body and soul united with His fullness body and soul. This can only happen if he gives us his phisical self in the Eucarist and He becomes one with us in His fullness.
 
We, in the Everlasting covenant, have been linked with the passage out of Egypt, the Diospora and the Tabernacle of the Jewish faith… To know that we have the richness of history, when we are apart of the Sacrificial mass, taking in the final culmination of the ONE TRUE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH, gives me goosebumps as I receive our Lord Jesus Christ in the state of grace!
 
Odell said:
Eucharist/ Transubstantiation *

Jesus is truly, wholly, and completely *present in the Eucharist in a metaphysical way, the physical properties, everything that can be perceived by our senses of bread and wine remain the same.
And non-Catholic Christians, believe something close to this when talking of justification before God through Christ Jesus. *St. Paul says in Scripture, “In Christ, we are made into a ‘new creation’.” *Now, clearly, this does not apply to our form – our “physical properties”, since we don’t look any different; and the world does not see any obvious physical change in a person when he or she becomes a believer in Christ. *However, according to the words of Scripture, we know that a metaphysical change HAS taken place – that the former sinner has been re-created in the image and likeness of Jesus, and is now a new creation. The metaphysical substance has changed. *Truly, wholly, entirely, and substantially. *And this is what we believe when it comes to the nature of the Lord’s Supper (the Eucharist).

Same with scripture it’s truly the word of God. Yet it looks no different than any other book.
Click to expand...
What about the Scriptures that say:“Our bodies are dead because of sin,[if Christ is in us] but our spirit is alive because of righteousness”?
we have been CRUCIFIED with Christ, therefore we ARE different than the people of the world or what we WERE!
Praise God,
GLam
 
ConstantineTG said:
I maintain my position that transubstantiation is just a catechesis on the Real Presence. It is not by itself the doctrine. We can believe in the Real Presence without the use of transubstantiation to explain it.
Click to expand...
In an earlier message, as I recall, you indicated the Orthodox reject the term ‘transsubstantiation,’ but you believe the bread and wine ‘become’ the body and blood of Christ. How do bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ?
 
Ferde_Rombola said:
In an earlier message, as I recall, you indicated the Orthodox reject the term ‘transsubstantiation,’ but you believe the bread and wine ‘become’ the body and blood of Christ. How do bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ?
Click to expand...
Substance
  1. that of which a thing consists; physical matter or material: form and substance.
  2. a species of matter of definite chemical composition: a chalky substance.
    Transsubstantiation doesn’t have anything to do with the modern concept of substance.
 
And it is The Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, not a body and blood
 
Orthodox doesn’t reject the dogma of the Transubstantiation nor the dogma of the Real Presence. In both churches they are considered FACT, but the orthodox explain the Eucharist the same way without defining a dogma.
The Body and Blood of Christ is in Eucharist (the substance in old philosophical view) and also Christ is present with it, the same way as at The Last Supper.
For modern science, the “substance in old philosophical view” does not exist.
 
Why the apostoles didn’t ask any explanation at The Last Supper? Because they believed in Jesus Christ. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top